T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
GENEL KURUL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130BRAH\u0130M KARAOSMANO\u011eLU BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/20078)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 4\/7\/2024<\/p>\n
R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 12\/11\/2024 – 32720<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
GENEL KURUL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Kadir \u00d6ZKAYA<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkanvekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkanvekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130rfan F\u0130DAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Tahir Hami TOPA\u00c7<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u0130brahim KARAOSMANO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. H\u00fcseyin AYDIN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n bir bilim insan\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ifadelerinden dolay\u0131 aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi nedeniyle ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvuru 14\/7\/2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Birinci B\u00f6l\u00fcm ba\u015fvurunun Genel Kurula sevkine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
III. OLAY VE OLGULAR <\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu, olaylar\u0131n ya\u015fand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihlerde Kocaeli B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehir Belediyesi ba\u015fkan\u0131 olarak g\u00f6rev yapmaktad\u0131r. Prof. Dr. O.H. (davac\u0131) ise ayn\u0131 tarihlerde Kocaeli \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesinde \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olup Halk Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ana Bilim Dal\u0131 ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revini y\u00fcr\u00fctmektedir.<\/p>\n
7. Davac\u0131, \u00e7evre \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131na etkileri \u00fczerine yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalarla tan\u0131nmaktad\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca olaylar\u0131n ya\u015fand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihlerde ba\u015fvurucu, Kocaeli \u00dcniversitesi Rekt\u00f6rl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan desteklenen ”Kocaeli’nin Dilovas\u0131 ve Kand\u0131ra \u0130l\u00e7elerinde Ya\u015fayan Gebelerden Do\u011fan Bebeklerde A\u011f\u0131r Metal Maruziyeti ile B\u00fcy\u00fcme ve Geli\u015fme Durumu” isimli projenin de y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
8. Davac\u0131, an\u0131lan proje kapsam\u0131nda edindi\u011fi bilgiler do\u011frultusunda konuya ili\u015fkin de\u011ferlendirmelerini proje hen\u00fcz tamamlanmadan bir gazeteciyle yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 r\u00f6portajda payla\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu r\u00f6portaj\u0131 yerel bir gazete “Annelerin s\u00fct\u00fc bile zehirli \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131”, “\u00c7ocuklar kanser e\u015fi\u011finde” ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 ile haberle\u015ftirmi\u015ftir. Habere g\u00f6re davac\u0131; Kocaeli’nin sanayi kurulu\u015flar\u0131 nedeniyle tehlike alt\u0131nda oldu\u011funu, sadece kan ve d\u0131\u015fk\u0131 \u00f6rneklerinde de\u011fil annelerin s\u00fct\u00fcnde dahi a\u011f\u0131r metallere rastland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ilin sanayile\u015fen kesimlerinde \u00f6len her \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015fiden birinin \u00f6l\u00fcm nedeninin kanser oldu\u011funu, bu tehlikenin bertaraf edilebilmesi i\u00e7in \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken kapasitenin art\u0131r\u0131larak yeni fabrikalar a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131, ulusal \u00f6l\u00e7ekte yay\u0131n yapan yaz\u0131l\u0131 ve g\u00f6rsel bas\u0131nda da haber konusu edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucunun farkl\u0131 tarihlerde davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131 hedef alan beyanlar\u0131 da yerel gazetelerde haber konusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Haber i\u00e7eriklerine g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“… Hoca bunlar\u0131 neye dayanarak s\u00f6yl\u00fcyor bilmiyorum. Bilgilerini getirsin ona g\u00f6re tedbir als\u0131n herkes. Bana g\u00f6re \u015fov yap\u0131yor. Raporu istiyoruz yok…. Bilimsel bir \u015fey varsa ilgili mercilere ula\u015ft\u0131rs\u0131n, herkes \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015feni yaps\u0131n… Bilimselik yoksa su\u00e7 duyurusu yap\u0131l\u0131r. Konu\u015fmak kolay, belge nerede, neye dayanarak s\u00f6yledin. Ispat\u0131n\u0131 yapmas\u0131 laz\u0131m. \u015earlatanl\u0131k yap\u0131yor…”<\/p>\n
”\u015eimdi birileri \u00e7\u0131k\u0131p anne s\u00fct\u00fcnde ve bebeklerin d\u0131\u015fk\u0131lar\u0131nda a\u011f\u0131r metallere rastland\u0131 diyor. Ancak hi\u00e7 bir dayana\u011f\u0131, hi\u00e7bir belgesi yok. Valili\u011fe, Sa\u011fl\u0131k M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’ne ya da belediyelere bununla ilgili bir rapor, bir belge verdi mi? Sadece ad\u0131 Profes\u00f6r. Adam \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yor bilgi, belge olmadan konu\u015fuyor. B\u00f6yle bir hakk\u0131 yok. Bilim adam\u0131 belgelerle konu\u015fur. Onun bu yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131na ise \u015farlatanl\u0131k denir, \u015fov yapmak denir. Bilim adam\u0131 \u015farlatanl\u0131k, \u015fov yapmaz ve ideolojik davranmaz…”<\/p>\n
10. Davac\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131nda ge\u00e7en ifadeler nedeniyle ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131da bulunuldu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla 2\/2\/2011 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine manevi tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. Davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Kocaeli 3. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi (Mahkeme) 26\/5\/2016 tarihinde davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcyle ba\u015fvurucunun 5.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6demesine karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Davac\u0131 Kocaeli \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi Halk Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ana Bilim Dal\u0131 Ba\u015fkan\u0131 olarak g\u00f6rev yapan \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesidir. Prof\u00f6ser \u00fcnvan\u0131na sahip bir bilim adam\u0131 oldu\u011fu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. Kocaeli \u00dcniversitesi rekt\u00f6rl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bilimsel ara\u015ft\u0131rma projeleri y\u00f6netim kurulunun 17\/02\/2009 tarihinde yap\u0131lan toplant\u0131s\u0131nda ‘Kocaeli’ nin Dilovas\u0131 ve Kand\u0131ra \u0130l\u00e7elerinde Ya\u015fayan Gebelerden Do\u011fan Bebeklerde A\u011f\u0131r Metal Maruziyeti ile B\u00fcy\u00fcme ve Geli\u015fme Durumu’ isimli projenin uygulanmas\u0131na ve 2009 mali y\u0131l\u0131 itibariyle \u00f6denek ayr\u0131lmas\u0131na ve projenin Haziran 2011 tarihinde tamamlanmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, davac\u0131 bu suretle g\u00f6revlendirilmi\u015ftir. Proje kapsam\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ara\u015ft\u0131rma ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar sonucunda edindi\u011fi bilgilerini (hen\u00fcz proje tamamlanmadan)bir gazeteci ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6yle\u015fide payla\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda do\u011frudan veya dolayl\u0131 olarak daval\u0131 veya ba\u015fka bir ki\u015fi ve kurumu hedef alm\u0131\u015f de\u011fildir. Yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespitlerin hen\u00fcz kesinlik kazan\u0131p kazanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bilimsel olarak do\u011fru olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya ilgili kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131na bilgi vermeden bas\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 yapm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftirilmesi ele\u015ftiri hakk\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndad\u0131r.Ele\u015ftiri hakk\u0131 yasal bir hakt\u0131r. Ancak ele\u015ftirilen ki\u015finin ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftiri hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131rken, ele\u015ftirilerini daha iyi ifade etmek, kamuoyu taraf\u0131ndan daha iyi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamak i\u00e7in \u015farlatan, sadece ad\u0131 prof\u00f6ser, \u015fov yap\u0131yor, ideolojik davran\u0131yor gibi s\u00f6zler sarf etmesinde bir zorunluluk yoktur. Bu s\u00f6zler i\u00e7erikleri itibariyle ki\u015fiyi \u00fczecek, toplum \u00f6n\u00fcnde k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrecek nitelikte s\u00f6zlerdir. T\u00fcm bu nedenlerle daval\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131\u011fa \u00e7\u0131kan s\u00f6zleri ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015f\u0131p davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu sonu\u00e7 ve kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.”<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu vekilinin temyizi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay 4. Hukuk Dairesi 26\/2\/2020 tarihli ilamla h\u00fckm\u00fcn onanmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130LG\u0130L\u0130 HUKUK<\/p>\n
A. Ulusal Hukuk<\/p>\n
13. 11\/1\/2011 tarihli ve 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 49. maddesi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u201cKusurlu ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir fiille ba\u015fkas\u0131na zarar veren, bu zarar\u0131 gidermekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Zarar verici fiili yasaklayan bir hukuk kural\u0131 bulunmasa bile, ahlaka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir fiille ba\u015fkas\u0131na kasten zarar veren de,bu zarar\u0131 gidermekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.\u201d<\/p>\n
B. Uluslararas\u0131 Hukuk<\/p>\n
14. \u0130lgili uluslararas\u0131 hukuk i\u00e7in bkz. \u0130sa G\u00f6k, B. No: 2015\/805, 12\/9\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 19-23.<\/p>\n
V. \u0130NCELEME VE GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
15. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 4\/7\/2024 tarihinde yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu toplant\u0131da ba\u015fvuru incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
A. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u0130ddialar\u0131 ve Bakanl\u0131k G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc<\/p>\n
16. Ba\u015fvurucu; davac\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n ulusal \u00f6l\u00e7ekte yay\u0131n yapan yaz\u0131l\u0131 ve g\u00f6rsel bas\u0131nda yer bularak Belediyenin g\u00f6revini yerine getirmedi\u011fi imaj\u0131 yaratt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu kapsamda kendisinin ele\u015ftiri ve cevap hakk\u0131n\u0131 kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n kamu menfaatine ili\u015fkin bir konuda ve tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f ki\u015filer aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7mesinden dolay\u0131 ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n daha geni\u015f yorumlanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. \u015eik\u00e2yete konu s\u00f6zlerini davac\u0131n\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n bilimsel temelinin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulamak amac\u0131yla kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu nedenle aleyhine tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ihlal etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca Yarg\u0131tay Dairesinin karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7eli olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
17. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; somut olayda \u00e7at\u0131\u015fma h\u00e2linde olan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile \u015feref ve itibar hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda adil bir denge kurulabilmesi i\u00e7in konuya ili\u015fkin i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131n ve somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
B. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
18. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n \u201cD\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi a\u00e7\u0131klama ve yayma h\u00fcrriyeti\u201d kenar ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 26. maddesinin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Herkes, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ve kanaatlerini s\u00f6z, yaz\u0131, resim veya ba\u015fka yollarla tek ba\u015f\u0131na veya toplu olarak a\u00e7\u0131klama ve yayma hakk\u0131na sahiptir. Bu h\u00fcrriyet resmi makamlar\u0131n m\u00fcdahalesi olmaks\u0131z\u0131n haber veya fikir almak ya da vermek serbestli\u011fini de kapsar…<\/p>\n
Bu h\u00fcrriyetlerin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131,… ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u015f\u00f6hret veya haklar\u0131n\u0131n,… korunmas\u0131 … ama\u00e7lar\u0131yla s\u0131n\u0131rlanabilir\u2026”<\/p>\n
19. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
1. Kabul Edilebilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
20. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
2. Esas Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
a. M\u00fcdahalenin Varl\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvurucunun bir akademisyene y\u00f6nelik s\u00f6zleri nedeniyle manevi tazminat \u00f6demesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu mahkeme karar\u0131 ile ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahalede bulunulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
b. M\u00fcdahalenin \u0130hlal Olu\u015fturup Olu\u015fturmad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/p>\n
22. Yukar\u0131da an\u0131lan m\u00fcdahale, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13. maddesinde belirtilen \u015fartlar\u0131 yerine getirmedi\u011fi m\u00fcddet\u00e7e Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinin ihlalini te\u015fkil edecektir. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13. maddesi \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“Temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetler, … yaln\u0131zca Anayasan\u0131n ilgili maddelerinde belirtilen sebeplere ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ve ancak kanunla s\u0131n\u0131rlanabilir. Bu s\u0131n\u0131rlamalar, … demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin … gereklerine ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olamaz.\u201d<\/p>\n
23. 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 49. maddesinin kanunla s\u0131n\u0131rlama \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fcdahalenin ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u015f\u00f6hret veya haklar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik \u00f6nlemlerin bir par\u00e7as\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve me\u015fru bir ama\u00e7 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Geriye, m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi kalm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
i. Genel \u0130lkeler<\/p>\n
24. Anayasa Mahkemesi ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ba\u011flam\u0131nda demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygunluk ifadesinden ne anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini daha \u00f6nce pek \u00e7ok kez a\u00e7\u0131klam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygun kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in zorunlu bir toplumsal ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lamas\u0131 ve orant\u0131l\u0131 bir m\u00fcdahale olmas\u0131 gerekir (Bekir Co\u015fkun [GK], B. No: 2014\/12151, 4\/6\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 53-55; Mehmet Ali Ayd\u0131n [GK], B. No: 2013\/9343, 4\/6\/2015 \u00a7\u00a7 70-72; AYM, E.2018\/69, K.2018\/47, 31\/5\/2018, \u00a7 15; AYM, E.2017\/130, K.2017\/165, 29\/11\/2017, \u00a7 18).<\/p>\n
25. Mevcut m\u00fcdahalenin zorunlu bir toplumsal ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lay\u0131p kar\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131nda sarf etti\u011fi s\u00f6zlerden ve iddialardan dolay\u0131 tazminat \u00f6demeye mahk\u00fbm edilmesine ili\u015fkin kararda, demokratik bir toplumda ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile davac\u0131 akademisyenin \u015f\u00f6hret veya haklar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda makul bir dengenin g\u00f6zetilip g\u00f6zetilmedi\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmelidir.<\/p>\n
26. Anayasa’n\u0131n 26. maddesinde korunan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ki\u015finin haber ve bilgilere, ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n fikirlerine serbest\u00e7e ula\u015fabilmesi, d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce ve kanaatlerinden dolay\u0131 k\u0131nanmamas\u0131 ve bunlar\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na veya ba\u015fkalar\u0131yla birlikte \u00e7e\u015fitli yollarla serbest\u00e7e ifade edebilmesi, anlatabilmesi, savunabilmesi, ba\u015fkalar\u0131na aktarabilmesi ve yayabilmesi anlam\u0131na gelmektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla toplumsal ve siyasal \u00e7o\u011fulculu\u011fu sa\u011flamak, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncenin bar\u0131\u015f\u00e7\u0131l bir \u015fekilde ve serbest\u00e7e ifadesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Bu itibarla Anayasa Mahkemesinin \u00e7ok say\u0131da karar\u0131nda ifade etti\u011fi gibi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi a\u00e7\u0131klama ve yayma \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc demokrasinin i\u015fleyi\u015fi i\u00e7in ya\u015famsal \u00f6nemdedir (Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7\u00a7 33-35; Mehmet Ali Ayd\u0131n, \u00a7\u00a7 42, 43; Tansel \u00c7\u00f6la\u015fan, B. No: 2014\/6128, 7\/7\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 35-38).<\/p>\n
27. \u00d6te yandan somut olayda oldu\u011fu gibi ifade a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131yla m\u00fcdahale edilen bireyin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde ge\u00e7en \u201cmanevi varl\u0131k\u201d kapsam\u0131nda yer almaktad\u0131r. Devlet, bireyin manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olan \u015feref ve itibara keyf\u00ee olarak m\u00fcdahale etmemek ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin sald\u0131r\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr. Bir ki\u015fi g\u00f6rsel ve i\u015fitsel yay\u0131n yoluyla bir kamuoyu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ele\u015ftirilmi\u015f olsa dahi o ki\u015finin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131 manevi b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirilmelidir (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, B. No: 2012\/1184, 16\/7\/2014, \u00a7 41; Adnan Oktar (3), B. No: 2013\/1123, 2\/10\/2013, \u00a7 33). Devlet, bireyin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131na keyf\u00ee olarak m\u00fcdahale etmemek ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin sald\u0131r\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 41; Adnan Oktar (3), \u00a7 33; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 45; \u00d6nder Bal\u0131k\u00e7\u0131, B. No: 2014\/6009, 15\/2\/2017, \u00a7 44).<\/p>\n
28. Mevcut olaydaki gibi ba\u015fvurularda ba\u015fvurunun sonucu, prensip olarak ba\u015fvurunun ihtilafl\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klaman\u0131n sahibi taraf\u0131ndan Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesine dayan\u0131larak yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ile bu a\u00e7\u0131klamaya konu olan ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131na dayan\u0131larak yap\u0131lmas\u0131na g\u00f6re de\u011fi\u015fmez. Aksi h\u00e2lde Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n an\u0131lan maddelerinde korunan haklar\u0131n dengelenmesinde benzer olaylarda \u00e7eli\u015fkili sonu\u00e7lar ortaya \u00e7\u0131kabilir. Yarg\u0131 mercileri bu iki maddede d\u00fczenlenen haklar aras\u0131nda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13. maddesinde ve bu maddenin uygulanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131nda ortaya konulan kriterlere uygun bir denge kurmal\u0131d\u0131r (Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
29. Somut ba\u015fvuruyla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak \u00e7at\u0131\u015fan haklar aras\u0131nda dengeleme yap\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ifadelerin t\u00fcr\u00fcn\u00fcn ve olgusal temele dayal\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, kim taraf\u0131ndan dile getirildi\u011finin, hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin kim oldu\u011funun, \u00fcnl\u00fcl\u00fck d\u00fczeyi ve \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 yan\u0131nda katlanmas\u0131 gereken ele\u015ftirinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n sade bir vatanda\u015fa g\u00f6re daha geni\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, ba\u015fvuruya konu ifadelerin konusunun, yay\u0131mlanma \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n, bu ifadelerin yay\u0131n\u0131nda kamu yarar\u0131 bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, genel yarara ili\u015fkin bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya katk\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131p sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, toplumsal ilginin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve konunun g\u00fcncel olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan dile getirilen d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelere cevap verme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve ifadelerin hedef ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ki\u015filerin hayat\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkilerinin de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 44; Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2), \u00a7 56; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2013\/6617, 8\/4\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 58-66; \u0130lhan Cihaner (2), \u00a7\u00a7 66-73). Bunun i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6yledi\u011fi s\u00f6zler, yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 konu\u015fman\u0131n tamam\u0131ndan ve s\u00f6yledi\u011fi ba\u011flamdan kopar\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n olay\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc i\u00e7inde de\u011ferlendirilmelidir (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 52; \u00d6nder Bal\u0131k\u00e7\u0131, \u00a7 45).<\/p>\n
30. S\u00f6z konusu de\u011ferlendirmelerde derece mahkemelerinin belirli bir takdir yetkisi bulunmaktad\u0131r. Ancak bu takdir pay\u0131, Anayasa Mahkemesinin denetimindedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla Anayasa Mahkemesi, bir m\u00fcdahalenin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile ba\u011fda\u015f\u0131p ba\u011fda\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususuna karar vermede yetkili olan i\u00e7 hukuktaki son mercidir (Sinan Baran, B. No: 2015\/11494, 11\/6\/2018, \u00a7 37).<\/p>\n
ii. Somut Olay\u0131n De\u011ferlendirilmesi<\/p>\n
31. Bilim insan\u0131 olan davac\u0131; ba\u015fvuruya konu olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi tarihte, sanayile\u015fmenin Kocaeli’deki halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131na etkileri \u00fczerine bilimsel bir proje y\u00fcr\u00fctmektedir. Davac\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu proje hen\u00fcz tamamlanmadan \u00f6nce bu konuyla ilgili olarak bir gazeteye r\u00f6portaj vermi\u015f ve Kocaeli’de halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sanayi kurulu\u015flar\u0131 nedeniyle tehlike alt\u0131nda oldu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir. Davac\u0131n\u0131n yerel gazetede haberle\u015ftirilen de\u011ferlendirmeleri ayn\u0131 zamanda ulusal \u00f6l\u00e7ekte yay\u0131n yapan yaz\u0131l\u0131 ve g\u00f6rsel bas\u0131nda da yer bulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
32. Kocaeli B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehir Belediyesi ba\u015fkan\u0131 olan ba\u015fvurucu ise davac\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu de\u011ferlendirmelerini hedef alan baz\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 “…Hoca bunlar\u0131 neye dayanarak s\u00f6yl\u00fcyor bilmiyorum… Bana g\u00f6re \u015fov yap\u0131yor. Raporu istiyoruz yok… Konu\u015fmak kolay, belge nerede, neye dayanarak s\u00f6yledin. Ispat\u0131n\u0131 yapmas\u0131 laz\u0131m. \u015earlatanl\u0131k yap\u0131yor…” ve ”\u015eimdi birileri \u00e7\u0131k\u0131p anne s\u00fct\u00fcnde ve bebeklerin d\u0131\u015fk\u0131lar\u0131nda a\u011f\u0131r metallere rastland\u0131 diyor. Ancak hi\u00e7 bir dayana\u011f\u0131, hi\u00e7bir belgesi yok… Sadece ad\u0131 Profes\u00f6r. Adam \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yor bilgi, belge olmadan konu\u015fuyor. B\u00f6yle bir hakk\u0131 yok. Bilim adam\u0131 belgelerle konu\u015fur. Onun bu yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131na ise \u015farlatanl\u0131k denir, \u015fov yapmak denir. Bilim adam\u0131 \u015farlatanl\u0131k, \u015fov yapmaz ve ideolojik davranmaz…” \u015feklindedir. S\u00f6z konusu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davas\u0131nda ilk derece mahkemesi, proje hen\u00fcz tamamlanmadan davac\u0131n\u0131n bununla ilgili a\u00e7\u0131klama yapmas\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftirilebilece\u011fini, bununla birlikte ele\u015ftiri hakk\u0131 kullan\u0131l\u0131rken \u015fik\u00e2yete konu s\u00f6zlerin sarf edilmesinde bir zorunluluk bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu s\u00f6zlerin davac\u0131y\u0131 toplum \u00f6n\u00fcnde k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrecek nitelikte oldu\u011funu belirterek tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar vermi\u015ftir. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz incelemesinde onanmak suretiyle kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
33. Eldeki ba\u015fvurunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesinde g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gereken hususlardan ilki hem ba\u015fvurucu hem de davac\u0131n\u0131n toplumsal konumlar\u0131d\u0131r (Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, B. No: 2014\/1577, 25\/10\/2017, \u00a7 59). Davac\u0131 \u00e7evre \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131na etkileri \u00fczerine ara\u015ft\u0131rmalar yapan tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f bir akademisyen, ba\u015fvurucu ise Kocaeli B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehir Belediyesi ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6revini y\u00fcr\u00fcten bir siyaset\u00e7idir. Ba\u015fvuruya konu olayda, davac\u0131 halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ilgilendiren bir konuda kamusal tart\u0131\u015fma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu da yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalarla an\u0131lan tart\u0131\u015fmada kendi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini ortaya koymu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
34. Ba\u015fvurucunun ele\u015ftirilerinin hedefinde olan davac\u0131 kamu taraf\u0131ndan bilinen ve tan\u0131nan bir ki\u015fi oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in kabul edilebilir ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131, sade bir vatanda\u015f ile kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda daha geni\u015ftir. Bu sebeplerle eldeki ba\u015fvuruya konu olay\u0131n taraf\u0131 olan davac\u0131n\u0131n kendisine y\u00f6nelik ele\u015ftirilere sade vatanda\u015flara g\u00f6re daha fazla ho\u015fg\u00f6r\u00fc g\u00f6stermesi gerekir (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. \u0130sa G\u00f6k, \u00a7 52)<\/p>\n
35. \u00d6te yandan se\u00e7menlerini temsil eden, onlar\u0131n taleplerini, endi\u015felerini ve d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncelerini politik alana aktaran ve \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131n\u0131 savunan, se\u00e7ilmi\u015f kimseler i\u00e7in ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00f6zellikle de\u011ferli oldu\u011fu da g\u00f6zden uzak tutulmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple m\u00fcdahale somut olayda oldu\u011fu gibi e\u011fer bir siyaset\u00e7inin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik ise ba\u015fvurular\u0131n \u00e7ok daha s\u0131k\u0131 bir denetimden ge\u00e7irilmesi gerekmektedir (Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, \u00a7 60).<\/p>\n
36. Ba\u015fvuru konusu olayda ilk derece mahkemesi ve Yarg\u0131tay, ba\u015fvurucunun davac\u0131 hakk\u0131nda kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifadelerin davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu kabul etmi\u015ftir. \u00d6zellikle “\u015farlatan” ifadesi ba\u011flam\u0131ndan kopar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ve sadece lafzi yorum yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 olarak nitelendirilebilir. Ancak b\u00f6yle bir de\u011ferlendirme, kamusal tart\u0131\u015fmada kullan\u0131lan ifadelere kastedilenin \u00f6tesinde bir anlam y\u00fcklenmesi sonucunu do\u011furacakt\u0131r. O h\u00e2lde sarf edilen ifadelerin ba\u011flam\u0131yla birlikte bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi bir zorunluluktur. Buna g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131yla esas\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6zen y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak hen\u00fcz tamamlanmam\u0131\u015f bir projede yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmelerin bilimsel ve resm\u00ee verilere dayanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n bilim insan\u0131na uygun bir tutum olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti\u011fi, bu ba\u011flamda davac\u0131n\u0131n profes\u00f6rl\u00fck \u00fcnvan\u0131na uygun \u015fekilde hareket etmedi\u011fini ima ederek davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 \u015farlatanl\u0131k ve \u015fov olarak nitelendirdi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucu, davac\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131yla halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda denetim yetki ve g\u00f6revi bulunan Kocaeli B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehir Belediyesinin \u00fczerine d\u00fc\u015fen sorumluluklar\u0131 yerine getirmedi\u011fi imaj\u0131 yaratt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n alt\u0131nda ideolojik bir saik bulundu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu noktada ilk derece mahkemesi ve Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n dava konusu ifadelerin olgusal temellerine ili\u015fkin bir de\u011ferlendirme yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmelidir.<\/p>\n
37. Ba\u015fvurucunun kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifadelerin alayc\u0131, sert, abart\u0131l\u0131 hatta bir akademisyen olan muhatab\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan rahats\u0131z edici oldu\u011fu kabul edilse bile \u00e7evre ve halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda kamu menfaatine y\u00f6nelik bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu da tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca belediyelerin halk sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususundaki sorumluluklar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n davac\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131na cevap niteli\u011finde olup sebepsiz sald\u0131r\u0131 te\u015fkil etmedi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
38. Yukar\u0131daki tespitlere kar\u015f\u0131n ilk derece mahkemesi ve Yarg\u0131tay; kullan\u0131lan ifadelerin ba\u011flam\u0131n\u0131, ifadelerin dile getirilme \u015feklini ve nedenini, s\u00f6ylenen s\u00f6zlerin arka plan\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131, kamusal bir tart\u0131\u015fma ekseninde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini g\u00f6zetmeksizin soyut bir de\u011ferlendirme ile kullan\u0131lan ifadelerin ki\u015fisel sald\u0131r\u0131 olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kanaatine ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 52; \u00d6nder Bal\u0131k\u00e7\u0131, \u00a7 45). \u0130lk derece mahkemesi ve Yarg\u0131tay ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile davac\u0131n\u0131n \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda bir denge kurmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmam\u0131\u015f; yaln\u0131zca soyut bir de\u011ferlendirmeyle s\u00f6z konusu ifadelerin ki\u015filik hakk\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu kabul etmi\u015ftir. Bu sebeple ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat \u00f6demesine ili\u015fkin ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen gerek\u00e7eler, ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hakk\u0131na yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7in ilgili ve yeterli olarak kabul edilemez.<\/p>\n
39. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fe kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
VI. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
40. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi ve 20.000 TL tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100). Eski h\u00e2le getirme kural\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucuya manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda talebiyle ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak net 20.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VII. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u0130fade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR’\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Kocaeli 3. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesine (E.2011\/60, K.2016\/203) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucuya net 20.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.246,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 4\/7\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
Belediye Ba\u015fkan\u0131 olan Ba\u015fvurucu, bir bilim insan\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ifadeleri nedeniyle aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ihlal etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f, Genel Kurulun \u00e7o\u011funlu\u011fu taraf\u0131ndan Ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasan\u0131n 26.maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131, Kocaeli \u00dcniversitesi Halk Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ana Bilim Dal\u0131nda Profes\u00f6r olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta olup, \u00dcniversite taraf\u0131ndan onaylanan \u201cKocaeli\u2019nin Dilovas\u0131 ve Kand\u0131ra \u0130l\u00e7elerinde Ya\u015fayan Gebelerden Do\u011fan Bebeklerde A\u011f\u0131r Metal Maruziyeti ile B\u00fcy\u00fcme ve Geli\u015fme Durumu\u201d isimli projenin y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fcd\u00fcr. Davac\u0131 proje ile ilgili elde etti\u011fi bilimsel verileri hen\u00fcz proje tamamlanmadan bir Gazete\u2019de payla\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. R\u00f6portaj, \u201cAnnelerin s\u00fct\u00fc bile zehirli \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u201d, \u201c\u00c7ocuklar kanser e\u015fi\u011finde\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 ile yay\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun \u00fczerine Ba\u015fvurucu, yerel gazetelerde yer alan beyanlarda davac\u0131 hakk\u0131nda, \u201c\u2026konu\u015fmak kolay, belge nerede, neye dayanarak s\u00f6yledin. \u0130spat\u0131n\u0131 yapmas\u0131 laz\u0131m. \u015earlatanl\u0131k yap\u0131yor\u201d, yine ba\u015fka bir a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131nda \u201c\u2026 Valili\u011fe, Sa\u011fl\u0131k M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ya da Belediyelere bununla ilgili bir rapor, bir belge verdi mi? Sadece ad\u0131 Profes\u00f6r, Adam \u00e7\u0131k\u0131yor, bilgi belge olmadan konu\u015fuyor. B\u00f6yle bir hakk\u0131 yok. Bilim adam\u0131 belgelerle konu\u015fur. Onun bu yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131na \u015farlatanl\u0131k denir, \u015fov yapmak denir. Bilim adam\u0131 \u015farlatanl\u0131k, \u015fov yapmaz ve ideolojik davranmaz\u2026\u201d \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klamalar yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Davac\u0131, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 nedeniyle Kocaeli Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinde dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f ve Mahkemece, daval\u0131 (Ba\u015fvurucu) aleyhine 5.000 TL manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde, davac\u0131n\u0131n yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n herhangi bir kurum ya da ki\u015fiyi hedef almad\u0131\u011f\u0131, a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n bilimsel olarak do\u011fru olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kesinlik kazan\u0131p kazanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ilgili kamu kurumlar\u0131na bilgi verilmeden a\u00e7\u0131klama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftirilebilir oldu\u011fu, ancak ele\u015ftirilen ki\u015finin ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, daval\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftirilerinin daha iyi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in, \u201c\u015farlatan, sadece ad\u0131 profes\u00f6r, \u015fov yap\u0131yor\u201d gibi s\u00f6zleri sarf etmesinde zorunluluk olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu s\u00f6zlerin davac\u0131y\u0131 k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve ki\u015filik haklar\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131na yer verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u00d6ncelikle belirtmek gerekir ki, delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131 ilk derece mahkemelerinin g\u00f6revidir. Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi ise, derece mahkemesinin yorumlar\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a keyfi veya bariz takdir hatas\u0131 i\u00e7erecek nitelikte olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n incelemektir. Mahkemece, deliller toplanarak de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve daval\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n kamuoyu taraf\u0131ndan daha iyi anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in, davac\u0131 hakk\u0131nda sarf etti\u011fi \u201c\u015farlatan, sadece ad\u0131 profes\u00f6r, \u015fov yap\u0131yor\u201d gibi kelimelerin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle davac\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u201c\u015earlatan\u201d, T\u00fcrk Dil Kurumu s\u00f6zl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde \u201c1. Kendi bilgi ve niteliklerini veya mallar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6verek kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131ndakini kand\u0131ran, doland\u0131ran kimse: 2. Bilir ge\u00e7inen kimse” \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (bkz.sozluk.gov.tr). Buna g\u00f6re, somut olayda, davaya bakan Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan profes\u00f6r unvan\u0131n\u0131 haiz bir \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesine kar\u015f\u0131 kullan\u0131lan bu s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc ve hakaret niteli\u011fini haiz oldu\u011funun kabul\u00fcnde bariz takdir hatas\u0131 veya a\u00e7\u0131k bir keyfilik mevcut de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvuru, Anayasa’n\u0131n 26. Maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ifade h\u00fcrriyeti kapsam\u0131nda incelendi\u011finde, s\u00f6z konusu maddede \u201cba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u015f\u00f6hret veya haklar\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zel ve aile hayatlar\u0131n\u0131n yahut kanunun \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc meslek s\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131\u201d gerek\u00e7eleri ile hakk\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanabilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanununun 24. Maddesinde \u201cHukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak ki\u015filik hakk\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131lan kimse, h\u00e2kimden, sald\u0131r\u0131da bulunanlara kar\u015f\u0131 korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteyebilir\u201d ve ayn\u0131 Kanunun 25.maddesinde ise, \u201cDavac\u0131n\u0131n, madd\u00ee ve manev\u00ee tazminat istemleri ile hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 sald\u0131r\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla elde edilmi\u015f olan kazanc\u0131n vek\u00e2letsiz i\u015f g\u00f6rme h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re kendisine verilmesine ili\u015fkin istemde bulunma hakk\u0131 sakl\u0131d\u0131r\u201d d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Yine T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun 58. maddesine g\u00f6re ise, \u201c Ki\u015filik hakk\u0131n\u0131n zedelenmesinden zarar g\u00f6ren, u\u011frad\u0131\u011f\u0131 manevi zarara kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k manevi tazminat ad\u0131 alt\u0131nda bir miktar para \u00f6denmesini isteyebilir\u201d. T\u00fcrk Medeni Kanunu ve T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanununun ki\u015filik haklar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik yukar\u0131da yer verilen d\u00fczenlemeleri Anayasan\u0131n 26. maddesi uyar\u0131nca kanunilik \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131lamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Anayasan\u0131n \u201cBilim ve Sanat H\u00fcrriyeti\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 27. maddesine g\u00f6re, \u201cHerkes, bilim ve sanat\u0131 serbest\u00e7e \u00f6\u011frenme ve \u00f6\u011fretme, a\u00e7\u0131klama, yayma ve bu alanlarda her t\u00fcrl\u00fc ara\u015ft\u0131rma hakk\u0131na sahiptir\u201d. Buna g\u00f6re, davac\u0131n\u0131n profes\u00f6r oldu\u011fu, \u00dcniversite taraf\u0131ndan onay verilen bir bilimsel proje y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n hen\u00fcz tamamlanmam\u0131\u015f olsa bile projedeki bulgulara dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, gazeteye yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu r\u00f6portaj\u0131n bilimsel bir faaliyetin a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 mahiyetinde oldu\u011fu, yine bilim adam\u0131 olan ve bilimsel faaliyette bulunan davac\u0131n\u0131n yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n gazeteciler taraf\u0131ndan medyada ifade edili\u015f bi\u00e7iminden sorumlu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 da \u015f\u00fcpheden uzakt\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re, haberin ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bi\u00e7imi Belediye ya da di\u011fer kurumlar\u0131n g\u00f6revini yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 imaj\u0131n\u0131 uyand\u0131rsa da bu hususun davac\u0131dan kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilemez. Kald\u0131 ki, davac\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6\u011fretim \u00fcyesi olarak kamu menfaati olan bir konuda ve proje \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde a\u00e7\u0131klamalar yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ba\u015fvurucunun ise Belediye Ba\u015fkan\u0131 olarak g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, medyada yer alan haberlerden Belediye\u2019nin g\u00f6revini yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 imaj\u0131 uyansa bile ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n daha geni\u015f yorumlanmas\u0131 ve Ba\u015fvurucunun buna katlanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
Somut olayda, Say\u0131n Genel Kurul taraf\u0131ndan, Ba\u015fvurucunun yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar nedeniyle h\u00fcrriyeti ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 veya ba\u015fka bir adl\u00ee ceza ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 da nazara al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00e7ok say\u0131daki benzer ba\u015fvurularda adli yarg\u0131 mahkemelerinin kararlar\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirirken ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik k\u0131s\u0131tlamalar\u0131n niteli\u011fine ve kapsam\u0131na da bakmakta, bireysel ba\u015fvuruya konu olan yarg\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fcrriyeti ba\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 bir ceza veya tazminat \u00f6ng\u00f6rmesi aras\u0131nda \u00f6nemli bir fark bulundu\u011funu belirterek de\u011ferlendirilmenin bu ba\u011flamda yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerekti\u011fini ifade etmektedir. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi\u2019nin Mustafa Tepeli ba\u015fvurusunda \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihatlara at\u0131f yap\u0131larak bu husus a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u201c..22. Ki\u015finin itibar\u0131na yap\u0131lan sald\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n belli bir a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131k d\u00fczeyine eri\u015fmi\u015f oldu\u011fu h\u00e2llerde Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda m\u00fcndemi\u00e7 negatif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011fe, bireyin maddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131na etkin bir sayg\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in gerekli pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler eklenir. Pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler, ki\u015filerin birbirleri ile olan ili\u015fkilerini de kapsayacak \u015fekilde ki\u015fisel itibara sayg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla birtak\u0131m tedbirler al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir (\u0130lhan Cihaner (2), B. No: 2013\/5574, 30\/6\/2014, \u00a7 47; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2013\/6617, 8\/4\/2015, \u00a7 40). 23\u2026.Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle Anayasa Mahkemesi, devletin maddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011fa y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahalelere kar\u015f\u0131 etkili mekanizma kurma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn mutlaka ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerekli k\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na, bireyin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerce \u015feref ve itibar\u0131na m\u00fcdahale edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla tazminat davas\u0131 yoluyla da giderim sa\u011flamas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011funa karar vermi\u015ftir (Adnan Oktar (3), \u00a7 35)\u2026\u201d. (Mustafa Tepeli [GK], B. No: 2014\/5831, 1\/3\/2017).<\/p>\n
Manev\u00ee tazminat, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 \u015fekilde ihlal edilmesi nedeniyle duyulan \u00fcz\u00fcnt\u00fc ve kederin hafifletilmesine y\u00f6nelik bir \u201cgiderim\u201d olup, ceza hukuku yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 de\u011fildir. \u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde manevi tazminat\u0131n bu i\u015flevi nazara al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenlerle, Ba\u015fvurucunun Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi \u015feklindeki \u00e7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lm\u0131yorum.<\/p>\n
\u00dcye<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 4\/7\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/20078 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 GENEL KURUL \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u0130BRAH\u0130M KARAOSMANO\u011eLU BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/20078) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 4\/7\/2024 R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 12\/11\/2024 – 32720 \u00a0 GENEL KURUL \u00a0 KARAR Ba\u015fkan : Kadir \u00d6ZKAYA Ba\u015fkanvekili : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN Ba\u015fkanvekili : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Recai AKYEL \u00a0 \u00a0 Yusuf \u015eevki HAKYEMEZ \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Selahaddin MENTE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130rfan F\u0130DAN \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Tahir Hami TOPA\u00c7 Ba\u015fvurucu : \u0130brahim KARAOSMANO\u011eLU Vekili : Av. H\u00fcseyin AYDIN \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, belediye ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n bir bilim insan\u0131na y\u00f6nelik ifadelerinden dolay\u0131 aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesi nedeniyle ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130 2. Ba\u015fvuru 14\/7\/2020 tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. 4. Birinci B\u00f6l\u00fcm ba\u015fvurunun Genel Kurula sevkine karar vermi\u015ftir. III. OLAY VE OLGULAR 5. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir: 6. Ba\u015fvurucu, olaylar\u0131n ya\u015fand\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihlerde Kocaeli B\u00fcy\u00fck\u015fehir Belediyesi ba\u015fkan\u0131 olarak g\u00f6rev yapmaktad\u0131r. Prof. Dr. O.H. (davac\u0131) ise ayn\u0131 …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27,535],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15807","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n